The Supreme Court’s potential embrace of a legal argument from a prominent Christian right law firm threatens to impose a nationwide regime akin to Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law, placing an impossible burden on teachers, reports Vox.
This legal challenge, brought by the Becket Fund, seeks to mandate that schools proactively notify parents about any instructional materials or discussions involving LGBTQ+ themes and grant parents the right to opt their children out.
This push echoes the chilling effect of Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law, a statute so vaguely worded that teachers feared repercussions for even casual mentions of their same-sex partners. While Florida later clarified that the mere concept of being gay could be referenced, the law still permits the exclusion of LGBTQ+ figures from curriculum.
Now, the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor before the Supreme Court could extend this restrictive environment to every public school in the nation. Representing a group of Muslim and Christian parents, the Becket Fund isn’t directly demanding a classroom ban on LGBTQ+ topics. Instead, their strategy is to create such an onerous logistical hurdle for educators that any meaningful inclusion would become practically unfeasible.
The proposed legal rule would compel teachers to anticipate and disclose any potential LGBTQ+ content in their lessons, regardless of its direct focus, and then manage a potentially complex system of student opt-outs. This demand arises from a dispute over a handful of books with LGBTQ+ characters approved in a Maryland school district. Alarmingly, even the basic facts of which books are at issue remain contested between the parents and the district.
A federal appeals court previously noted the glaring lack of evidence about how these books were actually used in classrooms, their frequency of use, the specific content taught, or the resulting discussions. The Supreme Court’s decision to intervene at this stage, before lower courts have established these fundamental facts, is unusual and consistent with the current majority’s pattern of favoring religious, particularly conservative Christian, causes.
This move is particularly concerning given the Court’s recent history of expanding religious rights, as evidenced by a significant ruling shortly after Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation.
The legal precedent sought by the Becket Fund in Mahmoud could unleash unprecedented disruption in public education, forcing teachers to navigate an unworkable web of disclosures and opt-outs for any content that might conflict with a parent’s religious beliefs about LGBTQ+ issues.
